The Age of Entitlement

[1961MJS]

Come Lizzie, how many people do you know that would wear that shirt in public and not as a joke?

Yes, back in the day someone would have had a people of the breadline painting too.

later

 

[LizzieMaine]

Such a portrayal would have been sympathetic, not mocking and contemptuous. Some of the street-corner apple sellers in 1932 were dressed like vaudeville tramps, but nobody would have dared to *laugh* at them. The Bonus Army marched on Washington in rags -- but nobody dared to *laugh* at them. They reserved their contempt for the people who deserved it, the people who led us into the Depression, the people who unleashed tanks and gas on unemployed veterans.

That's the difference between then and now -- we have a vast, entitled class of people who are convinced that It Couldn't Happen To Them, and they further believe that anyone who is their "social inferior" is that way "because they want to be," and are thus fair game for every kind of mockery -- it's the worst kind of class privilege in action. I dearly hope I live to see the day when that class gets exactly what it deserves. Perhaps a couple of decades waiting tables or even working at Wal Mart at starvation wages while being crushed by student loans they'll never pay off will teach the little b******s some humility.

 

[Feraud]

In the past there was Jacob Riis photographing the poor to expose and hoping to improve the lives of impoverished people. Today's version is People of Wal-mart whose purpose is to mock and attempt to distance us from them. Go figure.

 

[Shangas]

That's the difference between then and now -- we have a vast, entitled class of people who are convinced that It Couldn't Happen To Them, and they further believe that anyone who is their "social inferior" is that way "because they want to be," and are thus fair game for every kind of mockery -- it's the worst kind of class privilege in action. I dearly hope I live to see the day when that class gets exactly what it deserves. Perhaps a couple of decades waiting tables or even working at Wal Mart at starvation wages while being crushed by student loans they'll never pay off will teach the little b******s some humility.

The way you mention all that makes it sound like a study in Victorian-era morality.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Indeed. "We've Come So Far."

 

[AmateisGal]

But hasn't it always sort of been this way? I guess I can't see a wealthy, entitled gentleman of the Gilded Age exactly sympathizing with a homeless man living in an alley near his house unless he's an altruistic sort of fellow. I think human beings have always held their supposed "inferior" in contempt. We have the aristocrats of France...the Russian aristocracy regarding the serfs as closer to slaves than anything, and lots of other examples.

I haven't done any specific historical research on this, but I would guess this is how it's always been. [huh]

 

[sheeplady]

The problem isn't that all classes shop at Walmart (which is something that really differs from place to place). The problem is the comments that are directed at these individuals on People of Walmart: A. Assume lower class and then B. Use slurs against the lower class to mock those people. It doesn't matter if it's directed at an individual who happens to be a millionaire, there is the presumption of the person being lower class and derogatory language being used towards them that makes it unacceptable.

For instance, I tell a story about someone I see shoplifting in a store. The person I am telling this story to assumes the person is a person of color, and starts making inappropriate racially charged and stereotyped comments about the person in the story because they assume the person is "X race." Even if the person is white, that doesn't make the racism any better. They're still racist because they use that language directed towards a person they feel is that race. A person is still classist because they use that language directed towards a person they feel is that class.

 

[Feraud]

But hasn't it always sort of been this way? I guess I can't see a wealthy, entitled gentleman of the Gilded Age exactly sympathizing with a homeless man living in an alley near his house unless he's an altruistic sort of fellow. I think human beings have always held their supposed "inferior" in contempt. We have the aristocrats of France...the Russian aristocracy regarding the serfs as closer to slaves than anything, and lots of other examples.

I haven't done any specific historical research on this, but I would guess this is how it's always been. [huh]

To a large degree yes. I think a point here is those poking fun at the images are absolutely not wealthy Gilded Age Industrialists or Russian, French aristocrats/landed gentry, etc. Most of the critics are probably a couple of paychecks from going under. It is not a matter of rich knocking poor.

Bank accounts aside most people criticizing the Wal-mart photos dress like s**t themselves. I don't see much of a sartorial difference.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I don't consider the Gilded Age to be much of an example to follow -- it was the abuses and viciousness of that era that created so many of the social-uplift moments of the early 20th Century. The thirties were an era in which "Remembering the Forgotten Man" meant to give him respect as well as the help he needed to get back on his feet, not to kick him back into the gutter and laugh in his face.

People talk a lot about Golden Era Values here, and that's exactly what I'm standing up for here. I couldn't care less about knowing which fork to use or what sort of facing is proper on the lapels of a dinner jacket or whether a hemline less than two inches below the knee means you're a tramp. Golden Era Values to me are the Spirit of the Bonus Army, the Spirit of '37, and not to get political, the Spirit of the New Deal. After all, FDR didn't say "I see one third of a nation ill housed, ill clothed and ill fed -- my gawd, how can they go out in public like that HA HA HA HA HA HA."

Those are my "Golden Era Values." It's a pity we've forgotten them.

 

[sheeplady]

But hasn't it always sort of been this way? I guess I can't see a wealthy, entitled gentleman of the Gilded Age exactly sympathizing with a homeless man living in an alley near his house unless he's an altruistic sort of fellow. I think human beings have always held their supposed "inferior" in contempt. We have the aristocrats of France...the Russian aristocracy regarding the serfs as closer to slaves than anything, and lots of other examples.

I haven't done any specific historical research on this, but I would guess this is how it's always been. [huh]

I think the difference is that many of the people who are in the mockery have very little that separate them from the people they are mocking. One of my friends used to say that everybody in the middle class is about three strokes of bad luck (or less) from living in our cars. There's really no need for a billionaire to separate themselves through mockery of the lower class, they'd have to have a lot more than 3 bad things happen to them. But it's like a defense mechanism for a segment of people in the middle class. I think they fear being poor so deeply (and realize how easily they could be poor) that they strike out and try to separate themselves from the poor and working class. Or at least that's how I see it.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

It's an interesting point. Amazingly, the British courts disagree!!! A white football player calling a black football player a f****** black c*** was apparently not using racist language. We've come so far …[huh] Who says rich folks don't get different treatment? I'd like to see someone use this language on the streets, in earshot of a policeman, and get away with it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18827915

The problem isn't that all classes shop at Walmart (which is something that really differs from place to place). The problem is the comments that are directed at these individuals on People of Walmart: A. Assume lower class and then B. Use slurs against the lower class to mock those people. It doesn't matter if it's directed at an individual who happens to be a millionaire, there is the presumption of the person being lower class and derogatory language being used towards them that makes it unacceptable.

For instance, I tell a story about someone I see shoplifting in a store. The person I am telling this story to assumes the person is a person of color, and starts making inappropriate racially charged and stereotyped comments about the person in the story because they assume the person is "X race." Even if the person is white, that doesn't make the racism any better. They're still racist because they use that language directed towards a person they feel is that race. A person is still classist because they use that language directed towards a person they feel is that class.

 

[AmateisGal]

I think the difference is that many of the people who are in the mockery have very little that separate them from the people they are mocking. One of my friends used to say that everybody in the middle class is about three strokes of bad luck (or less) from living in our cars. There's really no need for a billionaire to separate themselves through mockery of the lower class, they'd have to have a lot more than 3 bad things happen to them. But it's like a defense mechanism for a segment of people in the middle class. I think they fear being poor so deeply (and realize how easily they could be poor) that they strike out and try to separate themselves from the poor and working class. Or at least that's how I see it.

Good points. Of course, the Internet has made it ridiculously easy for this type of mocking behavior to flourish.

Lizzie, I see your point, too. I admire you for speaking out on this - you're right. Mocking these people is really despicable.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think the difference is that many of the people who are in the mockery have very little that separate them from the people they are mocking. One of my friends used to say that everybody in the middle class is about three strokes of bad luck (or less) from living in our cars. There's really no need for a billionaire to separate themselves through mockery of the lower class, they'd have to have a lot more than 3 bad things happen to them. But it's like a defense mechanism for a segment of people in the middle class. I think they fear being poor so deeply (and realize how easily they could be poor) that they strike out and try to separate themselves from the poor and working class. Or at least that's how I see it.

That's exactly right. And it's exactly the same engine that, historically, has driven a lot of America's racism: borderline whites siezing on poor blacks as targets for "I may be bad off but at least I'm not one of THEM."

That kind of attitude is not publicly acceptable anymore -- although it is still very much alive in the background. But poor whites are fair game for any kind of contemptuous name you want to throw at them -- "white trash," "trailer trash," "rednecks," "harveys" (one of the terms used around here), and I'm sure everybody knows the local term used in their own town. Poor is the new black for the middle class today, and nothing more displays the attitude of entitlement that's the topic of this thread, the attitude that "I'm ENTITLED to be above Those People, and I'm ENTITLED to consider them beneath me, and I'm ENTITLED to mock and ridicule and jeer at them."

It's interesting to me that one of the founders of the People of Wal Mart site is a law school student. I wonder what kind of a lawyer he'll turn out to be.

 

[Feraud]

It's an interesting point. Amazingly, the British courts disagree!!! A white football player calling a black football player a f****** black c*** was apparently not using racist language. We've come so far …[huh] Who says rich folks don't get different treatment? I'd like to see someone use this language on the streets, in earshot of a policeman, and get away with it.

That is some story! It's nothing new that celebrities and rich folk get away with a lot compared to us little people. Using that kind of language on the street may find one with a well-deserved beat down..

 

[sheeplady]

That's exactly right. And it's exactly the same engine that, historically, has driven a lot of America's racism: borderline whites siezing on poor blacks as targets for "I may be bad off but at least I'm not one of THEM."

That kind of attitude is not publicly acceptable anymore -- although it is still very much alive in the background. But poor whites are fair game for any kind of contemptuous name you want to throw at them -- "white trash," "trailer trash," "rednecks," "harveys" (one of the terms used around here), and I'm sure everybody knows the local term used in their own town. Poor is the new black for the middle class today, and nothing more displays the attitude of entitlement that's the topic of this thread, the attitude that "I'm ENTITLED to be above Those People, and I'm ENTITLED to consider them beneath me, and I'm ENTITLED to mock and ridicule and jeer at them."

It's interesting to me that one of the founders of the People of Wal Mart site is a law school student. I wonder what kind of a lawyer he'll turn out to be.

I came to the conclusion when I was first raising chickens as a young teen (around 13) that people are like a bunch of chickens. They have a pecking order and the most vicious chickens are the ones that are going to be next after they finish beating down the current chicken. There is nothing as vicious as a chicken that knows it's next. The highest up chickens like to stir the pot and keep the chicken house riled, but the middle and lower chickens are the ones that do the dirty work.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I don't like Walmart and I don't like what I see when I go, so I don't go. I've seen the site but don't read it because again, I don't like what I see.

I don't photograph people to humiliate them, and post the images online for everyone to bully. I have a mental picture in my head that's hard enough to get rid of. I don't like people in pajamas in public.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I came to the conclusion when I was first raising chickens as a young teen (around 13) that people are like a bunch of chickens. They have a pecking order and the most vicious chickens are the ones that are going to be next after they finish beating down the current chicken. There is nothing as vicious as a chicken that knows it's next. The highest up chickens like to stir the pot and keep the chicken house riled, but the middle and lower chickens are the ones that do the dirty work.

A perfect illustration of the American class structure. Keep the chickens down below fighting with each other and you'll never have to worry about being knocked off your perch. But if those chickens ever wise up and combine their forces......

 

[sheeplady]

A perfect illustration of the American class structure. Keep the chickens down below fighting with each other and you'll never have to worry about being knocked off your perch. But if those chickens ever wise up and combine their forces......

Exactly. I swear I have never seen as mean chickens in my entire life. They were mutants or something intent on killing the lowest rung (who tended to be the nice chickens). No one I have ever met had chickens as nasty as those things were, and I tried *everything* to settle that house.

But as much as I hated most of those damn chickens they sure taught me a lot about people. Finally the nasty chicken at the top died and the hen house totally settled down and I was even able to reintroduce the kind nice chickens who had almost gotten beaten to death. So take from that what you will.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

That's exactly right. And it's exactly the same engine that, historically, has driven a lot of America's racism: borderline whites siezing on poor blacks as targets for "I may be bad off but at least I'm not one of THEM."

That kind of attitude is not publicly acceptable anymore -- although it is still very much alive in the background. But poor whites are fair game for any kind of contemptuous name you want to throw at them -- "white trash," "trailer trash," "rednecks," "harveys" (one of the terms used around here), and I'm sure everybody knows the local term used in their own town. Poor is the new black for the middle class today, and nothing more displays the attitude of entitlement that's the topic of this thread, the attitude that "I'm ENTITLED to be above Those People, and I'm ENTITLED to consider them beneath me, and I'm ENTITLED to mock and ridicule and jeer at them."

It's interesting to me that one of the founders of the People of Wal Mart site is a law school student. I wonder what kind of a lawyer he'll turn out to be.

I grew up in section 8 housing with not very much, and was the recipient of bullying because of my financial status. Sadly classism is nothing new. From the teachers, too. I'm very sensitive to classism, and feel more comfortable around those who don't have "airs." I'm now "middle class" but never forget my roots.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I grew up in section 8 housing with not very much, and was the recipient of bullying because of my financial status. Sadly classism is nothing new. From the teachers, too. I'm very sensitive to classism, and feel more comfortable around those who don't have "airs." I'm now "middle class" but never forget my roots.

There were a lot more people in the Era who didn't forget their roots than there are now, which is part of the problem -- the rising generation doesn't realize that they aren't part of an unbroken line of well-educated, smartphoned, $5 coffee sipping, Target-shopping Normal Americans. Go back far enough in anyone's family and you'll find someone badly dressed with unkempt hair, probably smelling bad, working a dead-end job or no job at all, and suddenly all the ha ha yuck yuck won't seem so funny.

The more people remember their roots, the more likely it is that the chickens on the lower levels of the henhouse can stop pecking each other and can take a moment to look up and realize where the poop on their heads is coming from.